Dataset Information

Effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers on serum levels of epoxyeicosatrienoic acids and dihydroxyeicosatrienoic acids in patients admitted to a cardiovascular center.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Several clinical studies have demonstrated that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, but not angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), reduce the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. We found that ARBs inhibited the activity of various cytochrome enzymes in arachidonic acid metabolism, resulting in decreased in vitro production of epoxyeicosatrienoic acids (EETs), which exhibit vasodilation and anti-inflammatory effects, and their subsequent metabolites, dihydroxyeicosatrienoic acids (DHETs). The present study examined the effects of ARBs on serum levels of EETs and DHETs in patients admitted to a cardiovascular center.

Methods

A total of 223 patients were enrolled, of which 107 were exposed to ARBs in this study. ARB-free individuals were defined as the control group (n = 116). Serum levels of EETs and DHETs were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Multiple linear regression analyses were carried out to identify covariates for total serum levels of EETs and DHETs.

Results

A significant negative association was observed between ARB use and serum EET and DHET levels (p = 0.034), whereas a significant positive association was observed between the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and serum EET and DHET levels (p = 0.007). The median serum total EET and DHET level in the ARB group tended to become lower than that in the control group, although the difference was not significant.

Conclusion

ARB use and eGFR were significantly associated with total serum levels of EETs and DHETs. Our results suggest that ARBs could affect the concentration of EETs in vivo.

SUBMITTER: Kato Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8128744 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:In order to determine differences in cardiovascular cell response during nutrient stress to different cardiovascular protective drugs, we investigated cell responses of serum starved mouse cardiomyocyte HL-1 cells and primary cultures of human coronary artery vascular smooth muscles (hCAVSMCs) to treatment with β-blockers (atenolol, metoprolol, carvedilol, nebivolol, 3 μM each), AT1R blocker losartan (1 μM) and AT2R agonists (CGP42112A and novel agonist NP-6A4, 300 nM each). Treatment with nebivolol, carvedilol, metoprolol and atenolol suppressed Cell Index (CI) of serum-starved HL-1 cells (≤17%, ≤8%, ≤15% and ≤15% respectively) as measured by the Xcelligence Real-Time Cell Analyzer (RTCA). Conversely, CI was increased by Ang II (≥9.6%), CGP42112A (≥14%), and NP-6A4 (≥25%) respectively and this effect was blocked by AT2R antagonist PD123319, but not by AT1R antagonist losartan. Thus, the CI signature for each drug could be unique. MTS cell proliferation assay showed that NP-6A4, but not other drugs, increased viability (≥20%) of HL-1 and hCAVSMCs. Wheat Germ Agglutinin (WGA) staining showed that nebivolol was most effective in reducing cell sizes of HL-1 and hCAVSMCs. Myeloid Cell Leukemia 1 (MCL-1) is a protein critical for cardiovascular cell survival and implicated in cell adhesion. β-blockers significantly suppressed and NP-6A4 increased MCL-1 expression in HL-1 and hCAVSMCs as determined by immunofluorescence. Thus, reduction in cell size and/or MCL-1 expression might underlie β-blocker-induced reduction in CI of HL-1. Conversely, increase in cell viability and MCL-1 expression by NP-6A4 through AT2R could have resulted in NP-6A4 mediated increase in CI of HL-1. These data show for the first time that activation of the AT2R-MCL-1 axis by NP-6A4 in nutrient-stressed mouse and human cardiovascular cells (mouse HL-1 cells and primary cultures of hCAVSMCs) might underlie improved survival of cells treated by NP-6A4 compared to other drugs tested in this study.

Project description:ImportanceIt is unknown whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have a positive, neutral, or negative effect on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).ObjectiveTo determine whether discontinuation compared with continuation of ACEIs or ARBs changed the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized clinical trial of 659 patients hospitalized in Brazil with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were taking ACEIs or ARBs prior to hospitalization (enrolled: April 9-June 26, 2020; final follow-up: July 26, 2020).InterventionsDiscontinuation (n = 334) or continuation (n = 325) of ACEIs or ARBs.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Secondary outcomes included death, cardiovascular death, and COVID-19 progression.ResultsAmong 659 patients, the median age was 55.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46.1-65.0 years), 14.7% were aged 70 years or older, 40.4% were women, and 100% completed the trial. The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 6 days (IQR, 4-9 days) and 27.2% of patients had an oxygen saturation of less than 94% of room air at baseline. In terms of clinical severity, 57.1% of patients were considered mild at hospital admission and 42.9% were considered moderate. There was no significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital in patients in the discontinuation group (mean, 21.9 days [SD, 8 days]) vs patients in the continuation group (mean, 22.9 days [SD, 7.1 days]) and the mean ratio was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01). There also was no statistically significant difference in death (2.7% for the discontinuation group vs 2.8% for the continuation group; odds ratio [OR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.38-2.52]), cardiovascular death (0.6% vs 0.3%, respectively; OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 0.19-42.12]), or COVID-19 progression (38.3% vs 32.3%; OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.95-1.80]). The most common adverse events were respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (9.6% in the discontinuation group vs 7.7% in the continuation group), shock requiring vasopressors (8.4% vs 7.1%, respectively), acute myocardial infarction (7.5% vs 4.6%), new or worsening heart failure (4.2% vs 4.9%), and acute kidney failure requiring hemodialysis (3.3% vs 2.8%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 and who were taking ACEIs or ARBs before hospital admission, there was no significant difference in the mean number of days alive and out of the hospital for those assigned to discontinue vs continue these medications. These findings do not support routinely discontinuing ACEIs or ARBs among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 if there is an indication for treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364893.